Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07.16.24 HRC Packet Human Relations Commission July 16, 2024 6:00 p.m. Virtual Meeting [https://us06web.zoom.us/j/83956307886] I. Call to Order/Roll Call (6:00 p.m.) II. Agenda Adjustments (6:10) III. Approval of Minutes (6:15) A. April 16, 2024 Meeting Minutes IV. Open Comment Online only (6:20) A. Staff Response V. Action Items 1. Minimum Wage Exploration: Feedback on Engagement Summary • Presentation from Taylor Reimann • Questions and discussion from HRC Members • Input to city staff B. Report-back on June community events • What did Commissioners observe and learn? • Any themes or issues to discuss? VI. Discussion/Informational Item A. Human Trafficking information: options to share with community members? B. 2024 HRC Retreat planning 1. Agenda items 2. Decide on date, time, location VII. Staff Updates [chronic nuisance ordinance, POP, Day Services, how to watch/attend city council meetings] VIII. Commissioners Updates A. National Night Out (Carlos) B. Other updates IX. Follow Up Items/Closing X. Adjournment Attachments: April 2024 meeting minutes City of Boulder Regional Minimum Wage Exploration Engagement Report Human Relations Commission Tuesday, April 16, 2024 Online- Meeting 6:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Fikir Yacob, Carlos Valdez, Emily Loker and Aaron Neyer. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Jean Hilaire Rejouis STAFF PRESENT: Elizabeth Crowe, Ingrid Castro-Campos, Carin Armstrong GUEST SPEAKER: Tenant Advisory Committee Chair, RJ Boyle INTERPRETERS: Elena Klaver and Maira Oliva. I. Call to Order/ Roll Call/Oaths of Office The April 16, 2024, HRC meeting is called to order at 6:06 p.m. Co-chair C. Valdez facilitates the meeting in absence of the chair. Staff I. Castro-Campos administers Oaths to new commissioners. Aaron Neyer is sworn in for a five-year term and Emily Loker is sworn in for a one-year term. II. Agenda Adjustments- none III. Approval of Minutes Commissioner E. Locker moves to approve the March,19, 2024 minutes. Commissioner A. Neyer seconds. Motion carries 3-0. IV. Public Participation -none V. Action Items- none VI. Discussion/Informational Items: A. Staff member, C. Armstrong and Chair of Tenant Advisory Commitee (TAC) RJ Boyle presented an overview of the Eviction Prevention and Rental Assistance Services Program. 1. Program Information and Scope: this program came out of the Eviction without Representation Initiative (2020) which became Ordinance 8412 (2021). Since then, the program has provided legal services in eviction cases and rental assistance. Mediation is an important component of the program. Bridge to Justice is contracted to provide legal counsel to program participants. Staff also provide resources navigation support. Mediators are always present at eviction court. Mediation and resource navigation are available to all Boulder County tenants; rental assistance and legal counsel is for city of Boulder tenants. Access to the program is available at any point people are at, prior and during an eviction process. Program data collection is available on the website in the form of a dashboard, where programs outcomes are available to the public. 96% of the people who get to eviction court and have engaged with the program have not been evicted. 2- Role of the Tenant Advisory Committee: 5 tenants serve in the commission. They represent different demographics. They are appointed by the City Manager. The committee agrees on funding allocation, gives input on Ordinances such as Chronic Nuisance, they also look over data and program participation. TAC works on prevention and education. The program has been really effective, and data supports this. Another resource is the Tenant–landlord handbook for people to have access to information about their rights as tenants. Both staff and TAC chair recognized that funding last year was tight due to a number of changes in supports available to people, as well as the need to have more delineated program parameters (amount and frequency for example). Staff E. Crowe added that funds from the Human Services Fund and ARPA funds were used to supplement the program at some point. HHS continues to fund other key organizations such as EFAA and other non-profit organizations. These supports are really needed given rent increases, inflation, post covid, and many other dynamics. HHS continues to work in partnership with Boulder County, City of Longmont, and non-profit agencies at a regional level to plan how to move forward after ARPA funds are no longer available in 2026. Staff C. Armstrong shares that this year the fund allocation is within those delineated parameters and dollars are being stretched as much as possible to serve as many people as possible and keep people housed. TAC chair, RJ Boyle hopes for the dashboard is used in funding allocation by other service providers who have larger missions. Staff E. Crowe shared that other city services like Older Adult Services and Family Resource Schools have case managers on board who also are a point of connection to the services provided by EPRAS as well as many other supportive resources. 3- Staff C. Armstrong and TAC Chair, RJ Boyle, asked the HRC How could TAC enhance their outreach to tenants. TAC chair R. Boyle shared they participated last year in a few block parties and back in 2020 there was a subcommittee in charge of outreach. Staff C. Armstrong add the use of press releases, annual reports, referrals from agencies that are already in communication with people seeking assistance. Commissioner E. Loker suggests connecting with the community connectors and other block parties organized by those connectors. Staff C. Armstrong will add visiting with community connectors again. Commissioner A. Neyer suggests also using the data collected through the dashboard to identify trends or gaps in outreach. TAC chair R. Boyle shared the information available prior to eviction court, through the docket, is very limited since it only shows plaintiff and defendant names which makes it challenging to have a more preventive approach. Courts are supportive of the program and refers folks to it. Staff C. Armstrong and TAC chair R. Boyle invite the HRC to participate in a TAC meeting in the future. VII. Staff Updates- Staff E. Crowe shared city council had their two-day retreat. Official notes from retreat are not yet available online. A few news articles have been published by media. The direct ask HRC made to get more clarity and guidance from council was heard and it is an item that is being addressed by staff. Other HHS items regarding high utilizers are addressed by services provided by HHS. Staff E. Crowe shared an update on minimal wage regional approach. In the past the HRC participated in the past and in other capacities. This regional approach has been fuirtful and city staff has asked the HRC to help promote engagement opportunties. Staff T. Reinman will come back with an update again to the HRC later this year. Staff E. Crowe invites HRC members to sign up for the HHS Newsletter to stay informed about programs. Staff I. Castro- Campos shared an overview of the HRF and the funding cycles. She also shared the HRC workplan spreadsheet that lists events funded by HRF and other opportunities for commissioners to participate in and engage with community members. VIII. Updates from Commissioners- A. Events- Commissioner C. Valdez participated in the minimal wage community engagement bilingual session where people had the opportunity to share pros and cons based on their expereinces. He plans to attend the Dia del Nino event. B. Other items- none VII. Follow Up Items- Staff I. Castro-Campos ordered name tags for the new HRC members and will coordinate delivery and other onboarding steps. She will also share the Workplan spreadsheet. Agenda items for an upcoming meeting are TBD. VIII. Adjournment Commissioner F. Yacob moves to adjourn the April 16, 2024, meeting at 8:03 p.m. Commissioner A. Neyer seconds the motion to adjourn the meeting. Motion moves 4-0. Attested: Ingrid Castro-Campos Approved: Board Secretary Human Relations Commission Chairperson Date: 4.16/2024 Exploring an Increase to Minimum Wage Regional Engagement Summary Executive Summary TBD Regional Engagement Strategy In the summer of 2023, elected officials from the Cities of Boulder, Longmont, Lafayette, and Louisville and the Town of Erie directed the Regional Minimum Wage Working Group to conduct a study of our regional economy and community engagement regarding a minimum wage increase. Since August of 2023, regional teams have met to scope and administer these next steps. Teams include one staff member from each of the flve participating communities as well as 3 community representatives: one representative from the Latino Chamber of Commerce (in representation of the business community), a representative from the Self Sufficiency Wage Coalition (in representation of the workers and faith community), and a representative of Emergency Family Assistance Association (in representation of human service nonproflts). The economic analysis, which explores quantitative economic data as well as quantitative engagement data, will be provided in a separate consultant report. A standard engagement model operating at the ‘Involve’ level of the public participation spectrum was administered across the flve participating communities. While the model was consistent, there were some differences in implementation strategies that each community used. Details regarding each municipality’s unique approach can be found in the flve municipality-speciflc engagement reports. Engagement opportunities were available between mid-February until April 15th, and community members were provided options to participate virtually and in-person, with English and Spanish options at one of 14 focus group sessions and through an online questionnaire. Engagement by Numbers - 14 Focus Group Sessions - 993 responses to online questionnaire o 932 submitted in English o 61 submitted in Spanish Key Regional Themes Throughout the project’s engagement window, the regional team received thousands of comments through the online questionnaire and focus group sessions, both of which asked the same series of three questions of participants: 1. What do you think the positive impacts of increasing the minimum wage could be for you, (your family / your business), and your community? 2. What do you think the negative impact of increasing the minimum wage could be for you, (your family / your business), and your community? 3. Is there anything else you would like for local elected officials to consider as they make a decision on a local minimum wage? While there was immense variety in the responses that participants provided in the questionnaire and focus group sessions, several key themes emerged across the region. Each partner municipality produced its own engagement report to describe the key and unique themes that emerged in their respective communities. Each report explores the unique strategies and community characteristics that led to variation in engagement implementation and reporting across the region. This section summarizes key regional themes, each of which contains several key points that often confiict with one another due to the incredible complexity of this policy issue. Each individual report contains additional details about how these themes took shape in each municipality. Purpose of Minimum Wage Across the region, quality of life for minimum wage earners emerged as a top concern and topic of interest. The key points of this theme included A) Improve Human Dignity and Sense of Community and B) Minimum Wage vs. Living or Self Sufficiency Wage. Key Points Summary of Regional Sentiment A. Improve Human Dignity and Sense of Community - Minimum wage should enable people to afford basic needs and a dignifled quality of life amid the rapidly increasing cost of living - Higher wages would help minimum wage earners achieve greater work-life balance, spend more time with families and in the community, and improve their physical and mental health outcomes - Minimum wage earners could become less reliant on safety net services provided by public and non-proflt partners if their incomes increase - Increasing the minimum wage could help minimum wage earners afford to live and work in the same place, increasing a sense of community for minimum wage earners and keeping their contributions to the local economy within the community they work B. Minimum Wage vs. - The minimum wage is not meant to be a living wage or self- sufficiency wage but instead as a training wage for youth Living or Self Sufficiency Wage and inexperienced workers as they acquire experience, skills, training, and education - Raising the minimum wage may result in overpaying people who do not rely on the minimum wage to survive (often minors, college students with family support, or individuals using second jobs solely for additional disposable income) and disincentivize acquiring the skills and education needed to move into higher paying jobs Building an Attractive Community for Both Workers and Businesses Regional engagement revealed that one of the most immediate concerns relates to each community’s business environment. The key points regarding a minimum wage increase and how it impacts the region’s ability to build an attractive community for both workers and businesses included A) Factors that Attract and B) Factors that Repel. Key Points Summary of Regional Sentiment A. Factors that Attract - Higher wages may result in higher employee satisfaction, reduced absenteeism, leading to reduced employee turnover and greater efficiencies - Higher wages may lead to greater workforce attraction across the region and state, resulting in an infiux of available workers B. Factors that Repel - Businesses closing or moving to other communities due to an inability to absorb further labor cost escalations - In addition to a potential minimum wage increase, additional increases to the cost of doing business, including supply chain issues, raw goods and ingredients, rent and utilities, property taxes, state-mandated beneflts, and more, resulting in additional strain - Larger corporations and box chains will be able to afford labor increases, while small businesses are operating on much smaller proflt margins - Additional costs to address wage compression from raising the wages of those not currently making minimum wage to ensure a competitive pay structure, which could be devastating for small businesses - Impacts to employees, including termination of jobs, greater automation in the workplace, and fewer employee hours and beneflts; the jobs that are likely to be most impacted are entry-level opportunities for inexperienced workers Regional Economic Impacts Regional economic impacts were frequently mentioned as a longer-term concern and/or opportunity. The two key points in this theme were A) Spending and B) Infiation. Key Points Summary of Regional Sentiment A. Spending - Higher wages will lead to greater disposable income among minimum wage earners, resulting in higher consumer spending - Spending stimulates economic growth and will support businesses B. Infiation - Businesses may increase the cost of goods and services to offset higher wages, including price increases for both basic needs as well as tourism and leisure activities - Price increases will hurt minimum wage earners more than increased wages will help them - Consumers may respond to price increases by shopping in other communities where higher wages have not driven up the cost of goods and services Appropriateness of a Change to the Local Minimum Wage Government’s role in minimum wage policymaking was a common regional theme, with the key points A) Role of Local Government and B) Other Policy Strategies to Address Affordability. Key Points Summary of Regional Sentiment A. Role of Local Government - The federal and state governments already set a wage fioor - Market forces, and how businesses respond to them, should determine wages, not local governments - Higher levels of government set public beneflt eligibility criteria, and if local governments increase the minimum wage, people who rely on these services could be subject to the “beneflts cliff” phenomenon - Local governments should be leaders in this policy area and advocate more strongly for workers through an increased minimum wage B. Other Policy Strategies - Local governments should focus their efforts on other policies that will effectively address the larger affordability challenges in the region, especially related to housing - Local governments should prioritize additional resources for small businesses, especially if they implement a higher local minimum wage Sector-specific Impacts In addition to the above key regional themes, each of which displayed a spectrum of opinion, several industries throughout the region shared sector-speciflc impacts that would uniquely affect each of them. These included: 1. Restaurants/Tip -Based Industries: The hospitality industry, and speciflcally restaurants and those that use tip-based wages, shared concerns over a minimum wage increase due to both incredibly thin proflt margins and wage equity concerns. Tipped wage earners (referred to as ‘front of house’) already earn signiflcantly more than non-tipped minimum wage earners (referred to as back of house’) despite a lower base wage due to the state’s tip credit. Because the state legislation that enables local government to set a higher minimum wage does not allow for any variation in the state tip credit, these wage inequities could deepen as front of house staff receive the same gross wage increases as back of house employees. 2. Childcare: An increase to the minimum wage may impact childcare providers’ ability to provide essential childcare services to individuals and families at current prices, which are already cost prohibitive for many families. 3. Agriculture: Employers in agriculture, in particular, expressed concerns over their business viability should the minimum wage increase. Appendix A – Data from Additional Communities The regional online questionnaire that was used to collect community feedback allowed individuals from Unincorporated Boulder County, additional Boulder County communities, and outside Boulder County to submit responses. Because the form allowed respondents to select multiple municipalities in which they owned a business or were employed to capture accurate feedback from individuals with multiple business locations or jobs, several responses across municipalities were repeated. In addition to the flve municipalities participating in the regional study (Boulder, Erie, Lafayette, Longmont, and Louisville), this section reports on feedback received from respondents in other places. Unincorporated Boulder County Particular attention was paid to engagement data from respondents who identifled themselves as being employed or owning a business in unincorporated Boulder County due to their flrsthand experience with the County’s 2024 increase. In general, the feedback that was received from individuals in unincorporated Boulder County largely mirrored the regional themes above, with the only unique note being that the overall sentiment toward a local increase was more negative for both employers and employees than in other parts of the county. Most respondents from Unincorporated Boulder County described the impacts of a higher minimum wage in hypothetical terms, likely due to the increased minimum wage in unincorporated Boulder County only having been in effect for two-four months during the engagement period. A few comments did speak to the impacts of the 2024 increase, which are included below. Importantly, these comments are not scientiflcally representative of the sentiment in unincorporated Boulder County at large, but they do provide an interesting data point as decision makers consider an increase to the local minimum wage. - “I am based in unincorporated Boulder County. I have already taken steps to purchase new equipment that will automate part of our process. This equipment will replace what I previously relied on three entry level workers to do.” - “The higher minimum wage has already impacted my business in that previously I had competition for my jobs that paid better than fast food, taught a marketable skill, had greater variety, and was brainy-er work. Now I have trouble flnding people who are disciplined enough to learn the work when they can be on their phones, and talking to their friends all day at fast food jobs for the same pay.” Additional Boulder County Municipalities These municipalities include the towns of Jamestown, Lyons, Nederland, Superior, and Ward. The number of respondents across these municipalities ranged between two and 18. After reviewing respondent feedback in these flve towns, regional engagement staff did not identify any additional or unique themes. As such, the key regional themes above refiect feedback from not only the flve municipalities who participated in the regional study, but also the feedback received from additional Boulder County municipalities. Outside Boulder County Through the online questionnaire, feedback was received from other municipalities outside Boulder County, including Denver Metro cities like Denver, Golden, Englewood, Aurora, and more, as well as a small number of out-of-state municipalities. As with the additional Boulder County municipalities, the regional themes identifled above largely capture the feedback provided by respondents outside Boulder County. One interesting point to note is that there was a particular emphasis in many of these responses on other policy strategies, Key Point B in the regional theme titled “Appropriateness of a Change to the Local Minimum Wage” above. Speciflcally, many respondents emphasized rent control and price increase caps on essential goods. While these policy tools are not within local governments’ authority to implement, they speak to a wider interest in policies that address the impacts of high housing costs and infiation. Appendix B – Engagement Data Collected Outside Formal Engagement Window At the end of 2023, through the beginning of 2024, several community organizations and partners shared feedback on a minimum wage increase in anticipation of action by elected officials in the region. Much of this feedback was received when unincorporated Boulder County decided last fall to accelerate their local increase and moved forward with a January 2024 implementation timeline, rather than the 2025 timeline regional partners had been discussing. Community members and organizations advocated in favor of or in opposition to an expedited timeline for other communities in the region. Recognizing the value of this feedback and the effort community partners spent collecting and reporting it, this feedback is summarized below. Emergency Family Assistance Association (EFAA) EFAA provided substantial feedback on a proposed minimum wage increase prior to the official project engagement window from February-April of this year through an official policy position, their annual wellbeing dashboards, and their own questionnaires. This section summarizes the information they have previously shared through engagement outside the project’s formal engagement window. EFAA has advocated for an accelerated minimum wage increase to meet the needs of the lowest paid workers in Boulder County and strongly advocated for a January 2024 increase in line with unincorporated Boulder County. They shared that their number of program participants has increased dramatically since the COVID-19 pandemic, and the ongoing impact of infiation continues to increase the number of individuals and families requiring EFAA support. Even as EFAA supports more individuals with their rent, utilities, and food assistance, evictions in Boulder County continue to increase. The gap between the minimum wage and a self-sufficiency wage in Boulder County puts strain on their ability to adequately serve the community, and an increase to the minimum wage would beneflt the community’s lowest paid workers, decrease their reliance on the local safety net, and enable individuals and families to make ends meet. These positive impacts would address known wage equity issues, as a greater proportion of their Spanish- speaking program participants report earning less than $20 per hour compared to all program participants, and Latino and Black Boulder County residents are more likely to live in poverty than other residents. EFAA’s program participant survey in 2023 largely revealed that most all the individuals and families that EFAA serves support a minimum wage increase to: - Better meet basic needs - Ensure human dignity for minimum wage earners - Enable people to work less and spend more time with family and in the community - Address the rapidly increasing cost of living in Boulder County Human Services Alliance of Boulder County The Human Services Alliance of Boulder County also conducted a survey regarding a minimum wage increase, and they received 33 responses from human service nonproflt organizations in October of 2023. - 78% of respondents favored a 15% minimum wage increase - 13% of respondents opposed a 15% minimum wage increase - 9% of respondents were unsure When asked about the potential negative impacts of a higher minimum wage on their organization, respondents often noted the following: - Many nonproflts operate on tight budgets, and an increase may result in the need to freeze hiring, terminate jobs, rely more heavily on volunteers, and prioritize additional fundraising efforts to absorb the cost of higher wages - Concerns about the beneflt cliff effect for nonproflt program participants - Potential negative impacts to nonproflts’ abilities to provide free or low-cost services - Negative impacts of wage compression, as many nonproflts currently pay above the minimum wage for employees with speciflc credentials and certiflcations and will need to increase their wages commensurate with employees making the minimum wage When asked about the potential positive impacts of a higher minimum wage on their organization, respondents often noted the following: - No impact due to already paying staff above the minimum wage - Potential for less strain on the local safety net due to a higher regional wage - Increased attraction and retention of employees - Dignity for the individuals that nonproflts serve Northwest Chamber Alliance The Northwest Chamber Alliance, a coalition of chambers of commerce across Boulder and Broomfleld counties, conducted a survey of business owners and employers in the region last fall in response to conversations about accelerating a minimum wage increase to a 2024 implementation timeline. In their summarized survey results, they shared that 254 respondents were concerned about increasing the minimum wage in 2024, while 107 were not concerned. Most respondents operated businesses in Boulder (190) or Longmont (143), and smaller numbers of respondents participated from Broomfleld, Lafayette, Louisville, Superior, and unincorporated Boulder County. In the qualitative feedback from the Northwest Chamber Alliance, several respondents indicated that minimum wage increases, in combination with existing pressures on small businesses such as rent and raw material increases, would almost certainly result in price increases for consumers. Business viability was an additional concern for many respondents. One respondent indicated that they already pay above the minimum wage and that increases would not impact their business negatively.